[97626] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The Choice: IPv4 Exhaustion or Transition to IPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Randy Bush)
Thu Jun 28 13:59:32 2007
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 10:34:37 -0700
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: John Curran <jcurran@mail.com>
Cc: Stephen Wilcox <steve.wilcox@packetrade.com>, nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <p06240802c2a99fb64fbc@[172.28.176.102]>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
> At 10:16 AM -0700 6/28/07, Randy Bush wrote:
>>> Interoperability is achieved by having public facing
>>> servers reachable via IPv4 and IPv6.
>> that may be what it looks like from the view of an address allocator.
>>
>> but if you actually have to deliver data from servers you need a path
>> where data from/in both protocols is supported on every link of the
>> chain that goes all the way to every bit of back end data in your
>> system. and if one link in that chain is missing, <sound of glib idea
>> imploding>.
>
> Randy,
>
> Organizations need to have IPv6 on their DMZ servers.
>
> ISP's needs to provide IPv6 to these organizations, either
> directly or via tunnel.
>
> It's actually rather simple.
repetition of an incomplete analysis does not make it complete.
maybe an example will help
if the data on one of those servers is derived from peoplesoft, sap,m
siebold, ... running within my infrastructure, either peoplesoft et alia
speak v6 and v4 or i need an alg or other payload translation mechanism.
think real time bank account data for another example, i.e. a slow batch
data write don't cut it.
randy
